Pathrise, a career accelerator program, is facing a class action lawsuit, accusing the company of misleading young job seekers. The lawsuit alleges that Pathrise did not fully explain to its users that they would owe monthly payments for years after landing a job.
The defendants in the case are Mavenform Inc., which does business as Pathrise; Leif Technologies Inc.; and Leif Servicing LLC. According to the court filing, these companies allegedly trapped job seekers into making unlawful payments under opaque, high-cost financing agreements.
The plaintiff's lawyers are Daniel "Sparky" Abraham from Jubilee Legal, of Oxnard; and Elliot Conn, from Conn Law PC, of San Francisco. The case was filed in San Francisco County Superior Court on Feb. 22 by named plaintiff Esther Solorzano, identified only as a resident of California.
According to the complaint, Solorzano worked with Pathrise in response to a job posting she found on LinkedIn. According to the complaint, Solorzano allegedly was subjected to "high pressure sales tactics" by a recruiter who allegedly persuaded her to sign a so-called Income Share Agreement (ISA), under which she would agree to pay 18% of her gross monthly income for a fixed period if she secures a job while enrolled in the Pathrise program, even if she does not secure the job through Pathrise.
Solorzano's lawsuit claims that Pathrise operates as an unregistered employment agency and induces job seekers into signing up for ISAs, which she asserts amount to loans governed by state lending laws.
The lawsuit alleges the defendants have violated various state laws including Employment Agency Act, Student Borrower Bill of Rights, Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Consumers Legal Remedies Act and Unfair Competition Law.
The lawsuit seeks damages, including restitution and punitive damages, plus attorney fees.